Hostless with the mostest

Lights, camera, action!


Covered in gold // The Oscars went hostless this year for the first time in a long time. “I watched the Oscars on Sunday and it did not make a difference to me that there was no host” said Aj Singh.

Ashlyn Parks, Social Media Editor, Writer

On Sunday, February 24, the 91st Oscar Academy Awards took place in Los Angeles. The Award Ceremony was hostless this year, and hasn’t been hostless since the 61st Oscar’s- considered the worst Oscars ever.

The 91st Oscars being hostless was better than having a host. The show went surprisingly well and got a lot of viewers. This year the show was planned differently than usual and had some eye catching moments rather than just doing what is done every time.

Many had a feeling the Oscars would be headed for disaster without a host this year. It gave the Awards that are announced during the commercials time to receive the award on television. It also made the Oscars run shorter, which has been the shortest Oscars with three hours and 20 minutes. It saved the Oscars money by not having to pay someone to host the show.

On the other hand, having a host makes the show a little more entertaining by the host. Including a host makes the show seem more organized by a steady hand helping run the show. Tina Fey, Amy Poehler and Maya Rudolph opened up the show after Queen’s performance, which in the beginning made it seem like they were all going to be the host for the night.

The solution is very simple, make the Oscars not have a host, considering it gets the most views whenever there is not one.

For the first time in 30 years the Oscars went hostless. The Oscars should not have a host anymore due to the number of views and it not falling into a disaster.The festivities of the show still continued without someone there to run the broadcast.